Just What Is Feminism Anyways?

Author

AliceShiki

『Ms. Tree』『Magical Girl of Love and Justice』, Female
Messages:
24,650
Likes:
98,370
Points:
834
Blog Posts:
140
So uhn... Let me start this one by linking 2 TED Talks I listened to some time back... I won't reference them much, and I don't agree to everything said in those, but I think they're a nice starting point.




The first talks about Cassie, a Feminist (well, she's not one anymore, but she was back then) that made a very polemic documentary over the Men's Rights Association (she highlighted the good parts of it), and the second talks about a Betsy, woman that agrees with many Feminist ideals, but doesn't consider herself a Feminist, but an Egalitarian.

Well, Cassie was attacked very very heavily by lots of Feminists and some people even tried to make petition to ban her movie "The Red Pill" from cinemas because of the "horrendous" message it passed... They probably never watched the movie (though for the record, I didn't either, but I have a hard time believing it is bad), because at least as far as Cassie explains the movie's purpose and her story of producing it, it's definitely just a movie showing the bright sides of the Men's Rights Association and showing that men have some real issues that they need addressed and yet nobody ever talks about. And her movie is shedding some light on those goals of them, even if she might not agree with everything they said, she is acknowledging they have real issues that need to be discussed at the very least, and not ignored like they are being right now.

Betsy's video on the other hand talks about how feminism is actually an outdated word and how it already lived past its time and should be shelved, and that the word feminism is actually harming the movement and that we should instead just focus on the equality and equity parts to name the movement, instead of focusing on women rights like we are right now... Because by focusing on the gender, we end up focusing on the split between men and women, when what we want is the equal ground between both sides, so she says the name of the movement these days is just painting a bad image and that it should be thrown away.


Well... So what are the goals of feminism anyways? Honestly, I had no clue a few years back, I only heard about the things feminism achieved decades ago (which were very good and great, mind you) and also heard some memes badmouthing feminists horribly... But I never heard people discuss what feminism wants. Isn't that kinda crazy? I mean... How can we talk about feminism, if we don't even know what feminism's goal is?

So I started googling, I wanted to understand more about what was the whole point of feminism in today's day and age when men and women already have equal rights in front of the law... And what I found was... A surprisingly simple and very sensible goal... They want society to treat men and women equally. Just that, like... Pretty simple, isn't it? And... That's a LOT harder than wanting the law to treat both equally.

You see... We kinda expect different things from men and women, we often expect men to be able to fix things in the house when they break and to be able to do all the groundwork to get things done, like... Painting the house, installing the computer, fixing the circuits of a plug that stopped working... Meanwhile we expect women to take care of most of the housework and to do the most part of the childcare.

Sure, it's not like 100% of the job goes to only one person or the other... But the expectations are there, and it often goes 80% to one and 20% to the other... Then what kind of impression do we have when a woman tells you she can't cook? Or a man tells you he has no clue on how to change a lamp. (for the record, it's ridiculously easy, but you'll never know until you do it... I actually had to google how to clean my toilet before I cleaned it the first time, it's super easy, but you need to learn it somehow.)

Those kind of expectations do get in the way when we interact with people on a day to day basis, and we judge people a lot based on those... Either consciously or subconsciously... At the same time, you might think most of it can be solved by having a healthy dialogue with the people important to you and taking care of properly deciding who needs to do what in order to not overload anybody.

... Except things aren't that simple, we don't interact only with the people we're close to after all. We can't really make agreements to the person at the store's counter or the person hiring us... I wish I could link to another Ted Talk for a particular argument that I remember, but I totally forgot what keywords I needed to use to find it, so you'll just have to take my words for it.

Anyways, in one of the things mentioned in the talk, they made a research in which they'd ask people to watch a video of a man trying to sell himself for a job interview with a given speech and the person that watched the video should tell their impression of it and if they would hire the man or not.
Then they'd do the same with other people, but with a woman saying the exact same speech with about the same intonation, and ask for the impressions too... And the reaction was vastly different.

You see, if the man was more imposing and more proactive, he'd be seen as a good leader... Whereas the woman would be seen as arrogant and unable to cooperate.
On the other hand, if the man was more held back and trying talking about teamwork and common goals, he'd be seen as too weak-willed and as someone without much determination... Whereas the woman would be seen as someone that cares for the well-being of the company as a whole and as someone that wishes for things to work out the best in a good environment.

It's a drastic difference in treatment that is many times subconscious... And it's... Putting it simply, one hell of a an annoyance? Being "forced" to act a certain way to be socially accepted, being constantly pressured from all sides to conform to certain standards... It's horrible. And that's what feminism fights against, what feminists want is for people to have equal rights before society and not only before the law. A man has the right to cry and be househusband just like a woman has the right to be a CEO and never give birth. None of those are wrong.

... Why is the name feminism then? If the goal is to fight for equality, why is it that women's rights are preferred and given much more spotlight than men's rights?
Well, 2 reasons... One is historic, the women movement formed long ago and already existed for a long time while the men's right is relatively new.
The second is... Well, perhaps it's better if I link a video for this one.



Paula talks about her experiences as a transgender and how she felt the change on how people treated her from when she was a man and now that she is a woman. On how she "became dumber" because she is a woman... On how when she is in an airplane and a man says that she is on his seat and she replies that she is not and he got the wrong seat, rather than the guy taking his ticket out and double checking, he starts and argument... This never happened when she was a man, this lack of respect and trust on her word didn't exist.

Or how when she went to a mechanic to ask some questions on possible issues on her bicycle, the mechanic kept saying that the problem was elsewhere instead of answering her actual question on a possible issue, he just automatically assumed she knew nothing about bicycles and therefore had no way of knowing what could be the possible problem... And this is undoubtedly subconscious, nobody will simply assume you don't know what you're talking about just because of your gender consciously... At least I hope not.

But it happens nonetheless, and it's an issue that needs to be dealt with... But how do you even fight against society's view on women? How do you change that?
... Hell if I know, if someone truly knew how to, we'd probably have seen more progress in the past decade on the feminist movement.

In any case, women have seen those issues for a long time now, and they want those changed, that's why they fight to change it, that's why it's feminism... As for why they don't fight for men's rights? Quoting Paula's words: "I couldn't have known, what I didn't know".

It's this simple, how can you know that men are afflicted by some issues... If you don't know they are? How can you know how to clean a toilet if you don't know how to clean a toilet? You just... Don't know, you need to google it, you need to ask someone, you need to search for information somehow... And you need to try actually going through it to truly understand it.

But gender is a big barrier, how can a woman know what issues a man goes through on a daily basis because of his own gender? She can't know, what she doesn't know. She never lived what he goes through, so it's really hard for her to imagine, understand, acknowledge and fight for his issues... It's why there is a separation, it's why there is feminism and Men's Rights Association... They're different because they don't know what the other side goes through. And they don't know, or might even not think it's necessary, to fight for the other side's rights. Because they don't know anything about the issues the other party has in the first place.

This is quite long already, so I won't start diving deeply into men's issues, I'll just link 2 videos on that for those interested. A big part of it is essentially that they are generally since a very young age told not to cry nor show their feelings, which can be horrible for them and to their relationship with everyone near them too... But well, I can't know what I don't know, so I can only parrot what I heard from others here.




So... Before I close this up I just wanted to address some misconceptions like... "Feminists are transphobic" or "Feminists want more women as CEOs but don't want more women working at coal mines" or "Feminists want men to start doing all the housework while they go full-time working" and other similar stuff...

First and foremost, a good part of everything you hear about people badmouthing feminists, is them paraphrasing some really stupid discourse from a radical feminist... As with literally anything in the world, the radicals don't represent the vast majority of any group, rather, they undermine and just harm the group as a whole... I have definitely seem transphobic radical feminists for example, I even saw one that didn't even understand the concept of gender once, which would be absolutely hilarious if it wasn't very very sad. So uhn... When you end up seeing some meme or whatever really badmouthing a real quote of a feminist... Keep in mind that she might be a radical that doesn't represent the actual goals of the movement and...

The quote is out of context. And context is very very veeeeeeeeery important, many things can be taken out of context and paint a completely different view from how things actually were... I particularly remember one TV commercial that passed in my country for a while, it essentially said something like, "He helped his country greatly recover from war, created millions of jobs, greatly reduced hunger" and a bunch of other wonderful things you'd love to see in any leader... Meanwhile, the TV's image was just a bunch of red and black pixelated dots, slooooowly being zoomed out. Until suddenly, it zooms out a lot in one go and you see Hitler's image. It was a very impactful message over how giving partial information and not giving any context can paint a completely different image about someone or something.

So... That's the first thing to keep in mind... As for the other misconceptions listed... Uhn... Just... Look at this wall of text of a blog post? I really tried my best to try explaining what are the actual goals of feminism, and wanting women to be above men is definitely not one of them, feminists want equality.

But just to entertain the thought of the coal mines... Like... Does anyone want more people working at hazardous jobs? Like... Really? Who would want that? I'm pretty sure everyone would be happy if all extremely hazardous jobs that have high impacts on people's health were all completely automated and nobody had to risk their life and compromise their health for the sake of earning their salary. Of course nobody would fight for more people working on a job nobody wants, that's just silly.

So, finally, just to finish... Uhn... Well, what do I think about the movement I guess? I think it has wonderful goals, but that they're most likely impossible to be met, though I'd be very happy even with a partial success.

Do I consider myself a feminist? Not really, I don't fight for pretty much anything and at most cheer people from the sidelines... And while I don't think the movement is obsolete or that it should be phased out, I do think it would be nice if some more importance were given to both sides of the coin instead of constantly vilifying people that fight for men's rights while glorifying and vilifying feminists at the same time.

If anything, I'm someone that just wishes people learned to love one another and not hate someone, some movement or some organization they know nothing about.

PS: I may or may not have said some stuff that doesn't exactly align with the exact mindset of feminists. I googled about the movement years back and didn't do any googling to refresh my memory before making this blog post, but I did see plenty of feminists making some Ted Talks in the recent weeks and I'm fairly certain I portrayed the movement's goals appropriately.

You, Lonelycity, Nargol and 10 others like this.

Comments

    1. lychee Aug 1, 2019
      @Lonelycity A few comments in response! ^.^

      First, I think like Moonpearl mentioned, it’s necessary to distinguish between the multiple compartments of feminism. Some groups are focused on more political change, and others more cultural change.

      Alice’s example of normalizing crying in men as not a bad thing is an example of a cultural change. No amount of political legislation will change society’s view; however, this doesn’t mean cultural change is an less important. Politicians and lobbyists can’t change this — however, celebrities, Hollywood directors, authors, and you and me (on a civilian level) have far more influence on this.

      If we speak of political change, immediately you have to focus into mainstream feminism — and it’s important to ignore arguments made by radical feminists because I can guarantee you that none of them are your elected representatives.

      Most of the issues pushed by mainstream feminism are hardly zero sum. For instance, in the United States, the top political issues currently being pushed by mainstream feminists include: (A) abortion rights, (B) eliminating the tax on tampons (in the US, essential medical supplies, which includes toothpaste, are considered tax-free, but feminine products currently are not considered part of this category, and (C) paid family leave, meaning husbands should be allowed to take paid leave to take care of their newborn children just like women can.

      It’s absolutely critical to read into what policies are being pushed by your local feminist politicians and evaluate for yourself whether they are zero sum or not. Feminism has a lot of enemies, and strawman arguments (and fear campaigns) are constructed all the time to delegitimize issues actually being pushed by rights organizations — the classic example I can think of is the bathroom bill for transgender people, where conservatives wrote a bill saying that transgender women should be forced to use men’s restrooms, claiming that you can’t trust a transgender woman not to sexually assault cisgender women — whereas in reality there is no data for this occurring; and in fact the data is in support of the opposite (cisgender men assaulting transgender women).

      This actual relates to much of the resistance that has developed against Men’s Rights Associations over the years. Part of it is historical. When feminists campaigned on Capitol Hill to expand voting and labor rights for women in the 20th Century, the MRA campaigned and lobbied against them. These battle lines have stretched back for decades, and the negative feelings go very very very deep. Even today, there is enormous resistance in Congress on even tiny issues like the tampon tax — but you have to keep in mind that we live in Trump’s America, and the actual center of the country is very different from the tumblr radicalists that anti-feminists form their fear campaigns against.

      Lastly, I wanted to discuss a reason why it doesn’t seem like feminist political organizations are campaigning for men’s issues, even though lots of us will broadly agree men’s issues are also important. To do this, you sort of have to imagine yourself as the chairman of a non-profit political organization.

      As a political organization, the money that comes to operate your organization (and lobby politicians) comes from donors. Consequently, you’ll see the age-old politics of “keep the donors happy.” Modern non-profit organizations are more transparent than they ever did before, and donors like to know exactly how their money is being spent. As a result, you as a chairman are responsible for spending that money on issues that your donors like, and not on issues that your donors don’t care about.

      In political science language, this is called having a “mandate”. Feminists organizations have a mandate for supporting women’s issues, and they have a limited capacity to stretch into fields outside of their mandate —or else they risk losing their funding sources.
      AliceShiki likes this.
    2. Lonelycity Aug 1, 2019
      @AliceShiki did you read what I wrote?
      I mean how do you plan to bring about these vague ‘conceptual changes’??

      The only things that can be changed easily are more materialistic(in nature)n THEY require resources...
    3. AliceShiki Aug 1, 2019
      @Lonelycity The main reason that it's not a zero sum thing, is that many of the things wished for one party won't really consume resources nor will it make things worse for the other party.

      As in... If men start being able to more easily express their feelings, women won't be harmed by it. Rather, the relationships between both will probably be more stable because they'll express what trouble them before the marriage breaks down.
      In a similar vein, if women start being taken more seriously, men won't be harmed by it. Rather, both work and personal relationships might work better when the people involved actually believe you know what you're talking about.

      It's not a 0 sum when nobody is losing from it and yet someone is gaining, it's the very concept of a win-win situation after all~
    4. Lonelycity Aug 1, 2019
      @lychee the last part of your point about the non zero sum nature of stuff actually makes me feel that iT IS ZERO SUM.

      The govt, public and anyone for all that it matters have finite resources which includes time skills and money amongst various other stuff... and once they are allocated to one issue/ cause / whatever you wanna call it, the other issues get ignored or put off...

      Now the feminists by being extremely vocal about their issues especially after the #me too campaign, I feel they are really molding the society’s mind... which would have been good if they were more moderate in their approach but alas they themselves are the reasons that the men’s rights movement came into being.

      Third wave feminists especially the punk or radical feminists of Greece and Russia, have completely derailed the campaign and made it a you die or I die situation. Besides what actions can you take an an individual?? These things require actions on a societal level and the ones who are leading them are the ppl I strongly disapprove of....
    5. Lonelycity Aug 1, 2019
      @Nargol Regarding women in armed forces and other rough occupations ( say mining and lumber industries) women were kind of banned from enlisting in them for a long time... And also that men feel more threatened when women choose these jobs over other traditional women jobs like say being a teacher.

      I’ll suggest you watch the movie ‘The North Country’ it’s based on a true landmark case in America... and while the events imo seem to be exaggerated quite a bit, it is true and very much real... Women aren’t welcome to macho male vocations.
    6. AliceShiki Aug 1, 2019
      @Moonpearl Thanks for the insight! I honestly don't know that much about different branches of feminism because I only googled a bit about them aaaages back, and like... I just remember really liking the premise of the movement from some people I found and being absolutely disgusted about the views some more radical people went by... I honestly didn't even know there were different branches between radicals...

      But yeah, as the movement has many differing views within it, then of course there will be conflict between factions... The movement is not homogeneous after all, no movement is.

      And ugh, the sad reality of people trying to fight for men's rights being pushed down is really depressing... It doesn't help that they're seem as "The Enemy" depending on who you ask... T.T


      @lychee Good point about it not being zero-sum and how the reductiveness just hurts the movement and the ideals it strives for! >.<

      And the thing about being only 24h in the day is so true too! Like... I barely have time to take care of my own life, how would I find the time to actively fight for a whole group's life? And then... Multiple groups even? It's just... Just how much time would I need to dedicate to all that? At some point we need to make cuts and decide on what we are going to focus on...

      There is also the fact that sometimes when we spread the focus too much, the movement starts not only losing strength, but the side with the least powerful people end up never getting what they want at all... Being always left for "the next time". I remember it very well back when I was in university and we had at least one strike every other year, and many times the strikes were yearly... The ones that started the strikes were always the people working at the university (mainly asking for raises), the professors (for some reason the category was separate from the workers, no clue why) joined about 50% of the time... While students joined 100% of the time.

      And the thing is... The workers always got their raise and sometimes a few more things... Meanwhile the student demands were never met (like better classroom conditions (we had some classrooms without windows nor AC, for example), more hiring of teachers because classrooms were overcrowded... Among others, I mainly remember those 2) and just left for the next strike which everyone knew would come soon anyways... It was very clear that the demands of the student body were never going to be met for as long as students were just "supporting" (for the record, the minority of the students were in favor of those... But it just so happened that this minority were the ones involved with the administration of the student body and the like, so... >.>) the strikes made by the syndicates, for the syndicates only cared for their own demands and never for the students' demands...

      I feel like that might actually happen too if social movements tried to apply for too many things at the same time... The louder group would have their demands met while the smaller group would kept being in the sidelines time and time again... Which does make me wonder if keeping movements separate might actually be a good idea... On the other hand, I don't think it's right for one movement to be seen as "the enemy" while the other is viewed as "the right one", so something needs to change... What exactly though? I'm not sure.


      @Lonelycity Threads are not the place for very polemic topics... This is borderline political even if my whole point was just trying to clarify what Feminism strives for and what are the complications it meets while trying to meet those goals.

      So... I prefer keeping it in a blog that I know not that many people will read.


      @Nargol I agree that there are some deep issues that definitely need to be addressed regarding men's rights! >.<
      Parental support is a really troublesome one for sure... I remember one day reading (or maybe it was hearing, I forgot) about a man that had a child and... He never knew about it, he didn't even know he had impregnated a woman.

      Until one day he received a notice from the justice system saying he had to pay money from 8 years or so of child support he didn't provide for... And like... He was outraged, he didn't even know the child existed those last 8 years, why must he pay for those now? It doesn't really make any sense, does it? (IIRC, the man was actually willing to give child support and did want to meet the child and see if he could become an actual father for the child... He just didn't feel like he should give money equal to 8 years of child support for a child he didn't even know existed)

      There are also the issues of someone being falsely accused of rape and how that can basically ruin their career and personal life even if they're proven innocent... It's pretty terrible, honestly.

      I personally agree a lot with this paragraph above all others though:
      It really is fine for women to fight for their own rights... What we can't do though, is to marginalize men and view them as "the enemy" and put any sort of fight they have for their own rights as something that goes against women rights... It's why I really loved the Ted Talk of "Meeting The Enemy" that I linked in the beginning of this blog, the fact she painted the Men's rights movement as the enemy for as long as she could until she realized they were not was a really good way of showing how discriminated the movement is and how important it is to realize that everyone has the right to fight for their own rights... And that this doesn't suddenly make them people that are against us fighting for our own rights.

      Lastly... I'm not sure how I feel about the disparity in the ratio of women in professions like police, military and firefighting... Mainly because I don't think I'd ever wish for anyone to be in those? Like... I know people apply to them, some even have their dream to be a part of those organizations, but they're the kind of thing I'd shy away from as much as I can.

      And uhn... Well I think it's important that everyone has the right to become one of those if they want to for sure, but I don't see any reason why people would try to fight for more people going into those jobs that... Many people don't even want to be in! >.<

      I think the reason people like to point out the vast difference between the amount of women that are CEOs and stuff is mainly because it's the kind of position many would love to be in and they are the face of what a "successful person" is... Though personally speaking, I'd never want to be in a position like that either, so I don't care that much for this statistic?

      I do believe society is slowly getting better and better as time passes though, and that people are caring more and more for ethic and becoming more open-minded than before... So I think things will slowly change for the better~
      Moonpearl and Nargol like this.
    7. Nargol Jul 31, 2019
      @lychee the argument about chivalry and its prevalence in western culture is one I'll admit I'm not prepared to have. In an emergency situation, the vast majority of people will prioritize their own life first. My problem is more with the idea the saying represents, and the fact that in the vast majority of dangerous jobs, men are the overwhelming majority. The amount of female firefighters for example is only 20% or so at best.

      The statistics you link are new information to me, and rather enlightening. I'm going to take another hard look at the subject.

      As for your point about male-female ratios, I'm sure you're simply unaware rather than being facetious, but births have always been skewed towards men. I'm no expert on the subject, but memory and casual googling mentions anywhere between 105-107 male births per 100 female.

      There is also research showing that, during and after war time when the male population declines drastically, the amount of male births rises. Ratios after the world wars are a good example.

      Theres also the problem of sex-selective abortions in countries like China to explain lower female ratios, but I'm again no expert so I can't say exactly how significant that is.

      Men do die more than women, and men do live shorter lives than women (on average, of course). If we are to agree that low amounts of women in STEM fields are a problem, surely the low amounts of women in professions like firefighting, police and military are also a problem? Not just because they are dangerous, but also because professions like police and soldier hold enormous amounts of actual power in society.

      I'm not inclined to trust that women, once having equal power and representation to men, will actually move to equalize the dangers both genders face. This is another reason I believe feminism needs to change fundamentally; part of human nature is greedy and selfish. It takes enormous effort and courage to counteract that evil nature, and equal amounts of foresight. If feminism does not become more egalitarian, I can only see a future where the movement itself becomes corrupt. That is not a future I want for my sons.
      AliceShiki and lychee like this.
    8. lychee Jul 31, 2019
      @Nargol I don’t mean to nitpick or disagree with what you said, because I’m 100% with you with a lot of things you said, but I just wanted to point out that the “women and children first” thing is largely considered to be a myth, although it has a very powerful grip on popular culture and expectations about Western Chivalric values.

      Source: History.com article

      Rather, they argue that the cases of the Titanic was remarkable because it was so unusual, and went down in urban legend because of the romantic value it conferred. Similarly speaking, “A captain goes down with his ship” is another romantic ideal that has little basis when examined in the actual historical record.

      Similarly speaking, actual first responders in the modern day do not triage by “women and children first” — rather they’re trained triage based on whoever is at most life-threatening risk first, regardless of their gender or age.

      And I wanted to point this out for two reasons:

      The first is that popular narrative doesn’t always line up with data in reality, and I would be cautious about conflating the two. If it were actually the case that it was “women and children first”, I would encourage you to look at hospital emergency room records or fire accident mortality records and test the hypothesis that female lives are prioritized over male lives — or even basic population demographics to see if there are more women than men alive in a particular area. Oddly enough, it seems that as fast as men die as soldiers in war or as police officers die fighting crime, the population gender ratio seems to remain fairly constant, around 50-50. I wonder why this is the case?

      All this facetiousness aside, my second point is that so much of this is deeply cultural. Classic chivalry, at least in the version that you described, is a deeply European and Western cultural value. This system of priorities has not been the same in all places in the world, at all points in history.

      There’s actually a Chinese idiom that goes along the lines of “siblings (sisters) should let their elder brothers have the first bite of the meal” — which by some regards is in fact the exact opposite of the “ladies first” chivalric norm of Western romantic culture.